If, as looks quite likely, the election is held after April this year and the Tories win, the Labour budget which will precede it will hardly be worth the paper it is written on. This is because the Conservatives have now committed to making immediate cuts to the budget if they become the next Government, instead of waiting a year before doing so.

And, importantly, they will instantly reverse any of Labour’s eleventh-hour Budget giveaways within moments of taking office (unless they agree with them).

It’s a bold move, both because there are plenty of economists who believe that such a move would potentially cut off the economic recovery before it has really bedded in, and because it will enable Labour to dangle a few (cynical) tax giveaways before the voters later this year and warn, truthfully, that these would be torn away from the potential beneficiaries by the nasty Tories.

Unless Labour manage somehow to win, or to force a hung parliament, pretty much every pledge in the spring Budget will be worthless. Even the forecasts will be under question. We always knew (as do the ratings agencies) that the "real" Budget is the emergency one that will follow the election. Osborne's pledge has put that beyond doubt.

It also underlines the fact that, despite fears that campaigning on spending cuts would ultimately damage the Tories, this is precisely the message they intend to take to the voters. Will it work? That remains to be seen. Whereas in the mouth of a real crisis (and the late 1970s, the last time the Tories fought on a spending-cut manifesto did have rather more of the smack of social breakdown than today), such a narrative may seem attractive and sensible to your average joe, it may seem more like overkill today given that the economy is pulling itself out of recession.

It is not, of course. The economic recovery this year masks the fact that Britain remains in deep trouble, mired in debts that if not dealt with could trigger a full-blown fiscal crisis. Osborne’s rhetoric will win him fans in the City, where investors realise that Britain is on the brink of a potential sovereign disaster. As I wrote in my column this week, the next few years will see a whole variety of countries, companies and individuals being excused some of their debts after pleading inability to pay. But whether it’s called debt forgiveness or a default, the upshot is the same: when your creditors don’t get paid, they will refuse to lend to you for a long, long time. If, on the other hand, you show yourself capable of paying back your debts in full, even if it costs you a few years of stagnation, you will be far better-placed than anyone else in the recovery.

The template here is Britain itself. It does not have a spotless record: British rulers defaulted in the 15th century to Italian banking houses; it did so again, effectively, in 1672, in the Exchequer Stop under Charles II. But in the 250 years that followed that, Britain had a spotless record in paying its debts in time, a record that is largely to thank for the expansion of the British Empire in that period. Other countries (France, for instance) with more chequered credit records suffered greater instability and lesser prosperity.

So, if history is any guide, Britain should, culturally and economically, have it within itself to stomach the necessary budget cuts. Whether it is something the public will vote for at the next election is another question.